GDT: Trade and Free agent rumours thread | Post Trade Deadline Edition

[Mike1]

Treliving was so bad at his job the hockey gods had to save him.

I wish they would have saved us from him. The decision to keep him in place at the trade deadline was so erroneous. He knew he was all but gone at that point.

 

[Malachi Crunch]

That is actually mind-boggling how close that was. Tre really tried to one-up the Carlo and Laughton trades. It is actually crazy how incompetent some of our previous management regimes have been.

It's Shanahan who is blowing my mind (in a bad way). Tre is Tre, but it was Shanny who hired him right away. It looked like Shanny also pushed the Carlo trade (reading non-verbal cues from the trade footage). Shanny was a much bigger d-arse than I thought.

 

[Vince Young]

I like the idea of a strong defensive line, and Tolvanen certainly is a dog. Who else do you have on this line?

He's not a dog, but I'd be intrigued by Mikheyev on LW. However we have McKenna/Knies/Cowan down the left side as it is.

 

[Vince Young]

Wow, EF said the reason why the Knies to MTL didn't go through was because it was submitted at 3:01.

 

[Morgs]

Its a fine return but a stupid trade.

Trading a 24 year old with term to recoup youth, but not trading a guy like OEL, with a mandate to improve around Matthews/Nylander the next year, is just pants on head insane. Nothing about any of it is actually in alignment short or long term, it's just doing stuff in isolation.

Assuming Pagnotta's right and the 'prospect' wasnt Hage I'd argue the return was bad and what's worse is that it would be a bad value trade to Montreal, which is so much worse.

In my mind dealing Knies is like 4th OA + Frondell. Or 4th OA + Rinzel +. This is not only not in that same realm, but it's also Montreal, who should be paying more than any other team if they want our 23 year old unicorn.

 

[Buckley]

Its a fine return but a stupid trade.

Trading a 24 year old with term to recoup youth, but not trading a guy like OEL, with a mandate to improve around Matthews/Nylander the next year, is just pants on head insane. Nothing about any of it is actually in alignment short or long term, it's just doing stuff in isolation.

I wonder whether the trade not happening impacted Pelley's decision.

 

[BertCorbeau]

I’m hoping it was one of Trev’s staff who saw that trade and was just like “nope” and held onto the details a little too long for a happy little accident

 

[Vince Young]

Was it here? I swear I read somewhere that the rumour the other prospect was Fowler

 

[Fogelhund]

I'd have him in a top 6 minute role. I think he's a good compliment to add speed and capable skill. He wouldn't get a huge bump in ice time but definitely can see him getting into the 15 min + range and an increased role overall.



I also kind of forgot about Cowan in these lines. I guess I'd expect him with the Leafs, so I would probably trim the roster down to fit him in. Probably don't bother with Tolvanen at that point.

I really like the idea of adding a Jenner or Laughton as a versatile veteran. They can play down the middle if injuries pile up, they are well respected, add some grit, etc. They are not perfect though.

I'd assumed you'd used Cowan in a trade.

I like Laughton as a person, but I just don't think the offense is there anymore to justify his $5 mil ask. Paced for 21 points per season with LA, after taking out his first two games. He's really a fourth line player, and that's David Kampf bad usage or resources for production and fourth line play.

Jenner will be about the same price, and he's never been below 0.5 PPG. The challenge with him, is staying healthy and in the lineup.

 

[4thline]

Assuming Pagnotta's right and the 'prospect' wasnt Hage I'd argue the return was bad and what's worse is that it would be a bad value trade to Montreal, which is so much worse.

In my mind dealing Knies is like 4th OA + Frondell. Or 4th OA + Rinzel +. This is not only not in that same realm, but it's also Montreal, who should be paying more than any other team if they want our 23 year old unicorn.

"Fine" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement, but I question the likelihood of those Chicago trades (damn near unprecedented return), and think that's overselling the gap between Hage and Zharovsky as prospects.

If we were ripping down the to studs - OEL gone at the deadline too, Matthews, Nylander, McCabe being auctioned this offseason- it would be "fine" a large injection of future value lost amidst a franchise redefining tear down.

With where we are today? Unmitigated disaster.
Where we on deadline day? Stupid beyond measure

 

[LeafsOHLRangers98]

Was it here? I swear I read somewhere that the rumour the other prospect was Fowler

I was wondering why Fowler was floating around in rumours given that he was labelled as the goalie of the future for the Habs, and then I realized that they had like 5 other high end goalie prospects that are probably close to the age they would consider signing... They are so deep everywhere. My god.

 

[Morgs]

"Fine" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement, but I question the likelihood of those Chicago trades (damn near unprecedented return), and think that's overselling the gap between Hage and Zharovsky as prospects.

If we were ripping down the to studs - OEL gone at the deadline too, Matthews, Nylander, McCabe being auctioned this offseason- it would be "fine" a large injection of future value lost amidst a franchise redefining tear down.

With where we are today? Unmitigated disaster.

I think the unprecedented thing would be trading a guy of Knies caliber, at his age, and on his contract without him demanding a trade. If these teams want him, they should be bleeding assets, and an A prospect plus two late 1sts isnt close to that for me. Two A prospects (Zhar + Hage) and two late 1sts is something you can work around.

To me trading Knies doesn't define the direction of the team if you can get a mix of now and future that can eclipse his value to the team. Where as trading Matthews, and to a lesser extent Nylander signals the beginning of a rebuild. If Chicago comes calling and offers 4OA + Frondell you can walk away with a NHL ready middle-6 player in Frondell with a ceiling I don't think is on Knies level, plus whoever you think is the best defenseman after Reid. Trading him for Zharkovsky and two late 1sts means you better hope your scouts can hit late 1sts, because what are the odds Zharkovsky is better than Knies in the now or future?

 

[Fogelhund]

He's not a dog, but I'd be intrigued by Mikheyev on LW. However we have McKenna/Knies/Cowan down the left side as it is.

Mikheyev plays RW, even though he's Left handed.

 

[4thline]

I think the unprecedented thing would be trading a guy of Knies caliber, at his age, and on his contract without him demanding a trade. If these teams want him, they should be bleeding assets, and an A prospect plus two late 1sts isnt close to that for me. Two A prospects (Zhar + Hage) and two late 1sts is something you can work around.

To me trading Knies doesn't define the direction of the team if you can get a mix of now and future that can eclipse his value to the team. Where as trading Matthews, and to a lesser extent Nylander signals the beginning of a rebuild. If Chicago comes calling and offers 4OA + Frondell you can walk away with a NHL ready middle-6 player in Frondell with a ceiling I don't think is on Knies level, plus whoever you think is the best defenseman after Reid. Trading him for Zharkovsky and two late 1sts means you better hope your scouts can hit late 1sts, because what are the odds Zharkovsky is better than Knies in the now or future?

Re: the bolded, I am highly skeptical that you can actually do that given his Knies' age, playstyle, contract status etc. A hockey trade for a 1C/ top pair D where we somehow avoid paying the positional premium maybe - but with where the team is now I think it's easier to execute a "mix of now and the future" trade with 1OA than it is with Knies.

In the context of a tear down - sure bet on Zharovsky and picks amidst the gaggle of other assets flooding in, but otherwise I just can't get over how badly Tre misunderstood the assignment.

 

[McCaber25]

Wow, EF said the reason why the Knies to MTL didn't go through was because it was submitted at 3:01.

The fact that this trade was as close as you can get to it being done and it being for futures only makes me a bit worried. To theorize, I feel like this means one of two things:

1. The reports of Matthews being unhappy in the direction of the leafs were known much earlier than reported and this was Tre getting ahead of the rebuild which would fully kick off with a Matthews trade.

2. Matthews found out in some way about how close this trade was and is what kicked off his stance that he needs to see meaningful change in direction for the team this year. I hope it was this.

 

[JEI]

I don't understand a world where they move Knies for anything but an equivalent roster player on defense. Would really need to be a home run.

 

[dubplatepressure]

The fact that this trade was as close as you can get to it being done and it being for futures only makes me a bit worried. To theorize, I feel like this means one of two things:

1. The reports of Matthews being unhappy in the direction of the leafs were known much earlier than reported and this was Tre getting ahead of the rebuild which would fully kick off with a Matthews trade.

2. Matthews found out in some way about how close this trade was and is what kicked off his stance that he needs to so meaningful change in direction for the team this year. I hope it was this.

its quite shocking really. Treliving was absolutely out to lunch.

 

[dubplatepressure]

I don't understand a world where they move Knies for anything but an equivalent roster player on defense. Would really need to be a home run.

Unless that unnamed prospect was Hage, I can't see how this package comes anywhere close to that. Zharovsky is a legit prospect but the others? Complete unknowns (unless the prospect was Hage). Its asinine.

 

[Morgs]

Re: the bolded, I am highly skeptical that you can actually do that given his Knies' age, playstyle, contract status etc. A hockey trade where we somehow avoid paying the positional premium maybe - but with where the team is now I think it's easier to execute a "mix of now and the future" trade with 1OA than it is with Knies.

In the context of a tear down - sure bet on Zharovsky and picks amidst the gaggle of other assets flooding in, but otherwise I just can't get over how badly Tre misunderstood the assignment.

Its really hard to see a trade that can help us now with him, which is why you have to be insanely picky if you're listening or determined to do it.

Its why this Montreal trade is a joke. Not only did Bradley apparently not do a bunch of due diligence prior to the deadline, he also decided to accept and we have no idea if any of the other 30 teams could or would beat that offer. You're basically taking a bet on one player (who does look awesome) and two lottery tickets that they can make up his value in the aggregate. A late 1st has like 60% chance of playing 100 games, but you have to not only be in that 60%, but also have to find the few stars that come out of it for the trade to be a win, and even then it's a bet for 3-5 years down the road. Even in a 'rebuild' scenario I'd be disappointed in the lack of quality.

To make the trade you need to find a team filled to the brim with quality assets that needs to take a step now, and can part with said quality assets. Its basically like Chicago, San Jose, Utah, and maybe Nashville/Anaheim?

 

[Fogelhund]

would you do the following?

2026th 1st OA, for Larkin and Seider?

 

[Vince Young]

I don't understand a world where they move Knies for anything but an equivalent roster player on defense. Would really need to be a home run.

Yeah, that or if Chicago goes crazy and offers Frondell + 4th overall

 

[Zero1]

Wow, absolute moron of a GM. He really tried to one up his Carlo/Laughton deals.

 

[Brobust]

One minute early and we'd be having JFJ vs Treliving debates for the next 10 years instead watching a minute of leafs hockey.

 

[TMLAM34]

would you do the following?

2026th 1st OA, for Larkin and Seider?

I wouldn’t even think twice about it really. No chance Detroit does that though.

 

[Morgs]

would you do the following?

2026th 1st OA, for Larkin and Seider?

I think you'd have to do it, but I doubt Detroit does it for Seider alone with how much he's improved the past year.